User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 36

  1. #11
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    What is a political party? All the members are supposed to have the same philosophy right? Well they still argue and debate and disagree. Has there ever been any grouping of people where they all agreed and it didn't seem distinctly inhuman?
    Can't argue with that. Seriously, I don't even agree with myself internally most of the time... there's always another part of myself that has a different viewpoint, it's just that one part is stronger than all the others most of the time, and is the one most people see.

    Although I must ask... how is this related to what I said about MBTI?
    All a type is supposed to be is a rough guide to how people act, think and reason. It's not supposed to be exhaustive or precise. It does help though to understand that some people are ENFPs and others are INTJs not so you can regurgitate the title or any of the preferences but so that you know where you can be blunt, where you need to be sensitive, whether to take that last point made as a personal insult or just a brutally delivered "hint".

    If language is only 20% of communication then how complex is communication and why can it not be all encapsulated precisely into words without making a book about it (ie too unwieldly to refer to as a guide whilst navigating other issues)?
    I guess I just don't see how to use something in such a vague manner. Perhaps it is more useful in that way, to others, but I honestly just don't know how you feel you can see what something is if it isn't clearly defined, or contradicts itself in places. How am I supposed to get this "picture" if I can't even see a remotely reasonable number of consistent qualities between people of the same type? If there isn't something consistent about these qualities showing up that I can respond to, how do I recognize anything at all about it's relationship to this idea?

    I suppose you'd have to take the ideas in MBTI at face value, but then not try to modify or sharpen your understanding of those ideas over time or via experience because that would make it too complex/specific, and thus applicable only to a smaller number of people. If I could somehow do this, I would have to hold the idea in mind without changing it or trying to apply it to specific behaviors (as I'm inclined to do). Then, observe people over time in various situations to see which trends existed in their behavior (without paying too much attention to what the individual behaviors were), find which ones matched most closely to those ideas/categories (which aren't being extended or changed at all) and then "force-fit" the pattern to one or the other, neglecting all the things that didn't fit, while having and developing no clear standard for what counts as an example of that pattern, force-fitting developing trends into that pattern without really knowing what it is or what it means, continually.

    This may be useful to some people, agreed, but I would have a hard time with this. It's difficult for me to see trends unless I'm looking for them and keeping track of them, then it's difficult to figure the "weight" of each thing that contributes to a trend, and I really hate the part where I discard everything that doesn't fit with the pattern and am expected to react to something very general that may not be the actual situation, just because it's the closest fit to a predefined pattern that I can't be sure is applicable or related to the situation at all.

    Do you think this sort of processing comes easier to yourself than it would to someone like me, perhaps? I can see how it's possible, it just sounds mentally intensive, possibly time-consuming (it takes time to see trends and it can't be done on first meeting someone or with little data), and comes with a high risk of misinterpretation that could only be resolved by continuing that process and hoping the normalized pattern begins to reflect reality more closely over time.

    If that's anything close to how you approach life, I wonder how you can stand it... you must be either incredibly gifted or incredibly crazy to be able to make something like that work.

  2. #12
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FallsPioneer View Post
    Similar to you, I had an existential crisis about what an INTJ is or what they are supposed to be, and it led me to create this one topic about how INTJ's usually behave because I couldn't understand the mass amount of inconsistencies between INTJs. I saw things in profiles that weren't clicking with me, and it wasn't doing much to quiet my own insecurities and search for an identity. I was totally distraught. However, I also saw myself trying to become an INTJ...so I was doing myself in.

    I began to understand my type as this: a set of preferences for certain behaviors. The keyword there is preferences. People are bound to exhibit all sorts of behaviors common to other types throughout the days. It's the nature of being human-having the capacity for all sorts of behaviors and emotions and talents, whatever our natural inclinations may be. I figure INTJs are more fussy about being INTJs and what they're supposed to be because we're anxious and think about stuff like our identity in relation to a system. =\

    Have you ever watched the Pirates of the Caribbean movies? Think of MBTI like the Pirate code. It's not a set of rules...it's more like a bunch of guidelines...or in essence, a rough sketch of different kinds of people.

    Remember: there's no such thing as a human-shaped box.

    (minus coffins. Oh yeah, I'm a pretty sensitive INTJ too.)
    I don't think sensitivity has to do with this. I really don't.

    I am myself and I do what I please (well, as much as I can get away with). I don't care for rebellion and I don't care for molds for the sake of them. But this has little to do with the question at hand.

    When someone says a word too many times, the word begins to lose meaning -- and I think that's what happened to me. I figure as long as I'm looking at a particular system I might as well do it right. I see the word, but I no longer understand what the hell it's talking about. It doesn't help that supposedly the word, when applying to other people, might supposedly mean six other words instead of the original -- and after a while, my head just hurts.

    I'm trying to redefine this again in terms that still make sense. Or maybe I should quit and go back to my crocheting?
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  3. #13
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    If that's anything close to how you approach life, I wonder how you can stand it... you must be either incredibly gifted or incredibly crazy to be able to make something like that work.
    Eccentric thank you so very much.

    What is a democrat?
    I'd be surprised if you could define one and not find a democrat who doesn't contradict your definition to some degree.

    Let's put it in more familiar terms

    What's a rogue?
    Is a rogue in full plate not a rogue?
    Is a fighter who can cast spells and not wear armour now not a fighter?
    Better still is a bard still a bard when they are not singing?

    Definitions are all well and good but if you ever think that they're all 100% accurate and encompassing then you're straying into the areas of grasping at straws.

    I think it's best encompassed by a film quote (as often I do)
    K ~ "Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  4. #14
    Senior Member Cality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    208

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haphazard View Post
    What does this have to do with sensitivity?
    Not much. I admit...

  5. #15
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    Let's put it in more familiar terms

    What's a rogue?
    Is a rogue in full plate not a rogue?
    Is a fighter who can cast spells and not wear armour now not a fighter?
    Better still is a bard still a bard when they are not singing?
    Well, in those cases, I'd say that the character was primarily a rogue, but had developed fighter skills/qualities, and is still a rogue until he becomes more proficient with melee/battle skills than his previous rogue skills. The fighter in the other case has developed mage skills/qualities, but is still primarily a fighter until his magic training surpasses his previous melee training, at which point he becomes a mage (but one who still possesses fighter skills/qualities). Being a bard means a person has the ability to sing, not that they cannot stop or that they must sing a certain number of times per day. If they forgot (or otherwise lost the capacity) to sing or compose poetry, then they might not be a bard any longer, but just a traveler. Anyone other than a bard who developed this skill could be said to have a bard quality. A bard who developed another skill beyond the level of his singing and poetry would still have bard qualities, but would now be primarily the thing associated with this other skill.

    Does that make sense? Class indicates one's currently strongest, most apparent quality or skill. This can change over time, and is a reflection of their status at the time the label was applied.

    The problem is that people say type cannot change, while we know that class or skill specialization can. If it were believed that type could change dynamically with a person's skills and interests (as class can), then it would be easier to see the analogy.
    Definitions are all well and good but if you ever think that they're all 100% accurate and encompassing then you're straying into the areas of grasping at straws.
    What did I say that implied I believed that? All I meant was that it was difficult to say anything in particular about members of a specific type, just because they had that type. There doesn't seem to be any consistent quality between them, except that they prefer some variant or degree of the same dichotomy. It seems to me that their reasons for preferring something are more important in telling us who they are, than their preference itself. MBTI focuses on the quality preferred, not the reason why it was preferred, which tells us more about the person in my opinion.

  6. #16
    Senior Member FallsPioneer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    260

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haphazard View Post
    I don't think sensitivity has to do with this. I really don't.

    I am myself and I do what I please (well, as much as I can get away with). I don't care for rebellion and I don't care for molds for the sake of them. But this has little to do with the question at hand.

    When someone says a word too many times, the word begins to lose meaning -- and I think that's what happened to me. I figure as long as I'm looking at a particular system I might as well do it right. I see the word, but I no longer understand what the hell it's talking about. It doesn't help that supposedly the word, when applying to other people, might supposedly mean six other words instead of the original -- and after a while, my head just hurts.

    I'm trying to redefine this again in terms that still make sense. Or maybe I should quit and go back to my crocheting?
    I think you should go back to crocheting. Your question is like "Does God exist?" for its impossibility to be answered, in spite of the fact that the God question is a lot more defined.

    As for the sensitivity thing...I just went with that because I am a sensitive INTJ, and since someone commented on that, I turned it into a joke.
    Still using a needle to break apart a grain of sand.

  7. #17
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    The fighter in the other case has developed mage skills/qualities, but is still primarily a fighter until his magic training surpasses his previous melee training, at which point he becomes a mage (but one who still possesses fighter skills/qualities).
    If you can classify someone as a mage but with the caveat that they can fight then you can, by the same process, also say that there can be an ENFP who's obsessed with logical reasoning and have an INTJ who's obsession with being right often makes them wrong.

    The point is that inclusion in one group does not require exclusion from another.

    'Do I contradict myself?
    Very well then I contradict myself,
    (I am large, I contain multitudes.)'Walt Whitman, "Song of Myself"
    US poet (1819 - 1892)
    As I see it, as a person grows they gather more contradictions. This is why younger people tend to be more stereotypical for their type than older people do.

    The reason I brought up that you can't rely on things to be certain is that you seemed to be getting all ravelled up in why a system with as many contradictions as the MBTI can be of any use. Well same as the class system in D&D it gives you a general idea on some of the "stats". For example you'll be lucky to find a Wizard without high intelligence same as you'd be lucky to find a cold ENFP. Both probably do exist but it's a fairly safe assumption for most purposes to assume that what you're looking at isn't one of those rare cases.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  8. #18
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    If you can classify someone as a mage but with the caveat that they can fight then you can, by the same process, also say that there can be an ENFP who's obsessed with logical reasoning and have an INTJ who's obsession with being right often makes them wrong.

    The point is that inclusion in one group does not require exclusion from another.

    'Do I contradict myself?
    Very well then I contradict myself,
    (I am large, I contain multitudes.)'Walt Whitman, "Song of Myself"
    US poet (1819 - 1892)
    As I see it, as a person grows they gather more contradictions. This is why younger people tend to be more stereotypical for their type than older people do.

    The reason I brought up that you can't rely on things to be certain is that you seemed to be getting all ravelled up in why a system with as many contradictions as the MBTI can be of any use. Well same as the class system in D&D it gives you a general idea on some of the "stats". For example you'll be lucky to find a Wizard without high intelligence same as you'd be lucky to find a cold ENFP. Both probably do exist but it's a fairly safe assumption for most purposes to assume that what you're looking at isn't one of those rare cases.
    See, this is the part I don't really understand. You say that if the person becomes better at something that wasn't previously part of their type, that they stay the same type, even if they become more that particular thing than they were the things associated with their original type. That doesn't make sense, because I think in terms of class skills, you are considered to be what ever class you have the strongest skills in (in other words, when skills of one surpass those of the other, the label changes). In MBTI, you stay the same type regardless of how much or little you resemble that type.

    That's what I really don't get.

    Unless, of course, you're saying that the person is still mostly their type, but hasn't become more the thing that they've added than the thing they were originally... in which case it makes more sense.

    But still... shouldn't someone who becomes better at and begins to tend towards being aware of, responding to, and making decisions based on people's feelings than they are at using logical reasoning, even if they used to be better at reasoning, still be considered an F?

  9. #19
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    See, this is the part I don't really understand. You say that if the person becomes better at something that wasn't previously part of their type, that they stay the same type, even if they become more that particular thing than they were the things associated with their original type. That doesn't make sense, because I think in terms of class skills, you are considered to be what ever class you have the strongest skills in (in other words, when skills of one surpass those of the other, the label changes). In MBTI, you stay the same type regardless of how much or little you resemble that type.

    That's what I really don't get.

    Unless, of course, you're saying that the person is still mostly their type, but hasn't become more the thing that they've added than the thing they were originally... in which case it makes more sense.

    But still... shouldn't someone who becomes better at and begins to tend towards being aware of, responding to, and making decisions based on people's feelings than they are at using logical reasoning, even if they used to be better at reasoning, still be considered an F?
    To risk continuing with an obsolete reference, if you spend your starting skill points as a wizard then regardless of whether or not you build your search up to higher than the rogue, you are not a rogue. You are and forever will be someone who began as a wizard and learned tricks from a rogue.

    I guess it depends upon if your starting point is the start or the now. In that example if you do start in the now and say the wizard has several rogue like abilities and only a few wizard powers (multiclassing not necessarily being at full caster level progression) then from a now standpoint they are a rogue with a wizards background but from a systematic approach they are a wizard who have learned rogue like abilities.

    Now this is where the model falls down. Humans never consider things in a vacuum. What was learned before alters the perceptions of the person and alters both how and what they learn. Hence though the wizard may become an excellent rogue, all the abilities which he learns as a rogue will be from an initial stand point of a learned wizard and not a chance taking resourceful rogue. So if you met a wizard who'd learned how to be a rogue then yes they probably can do everything that a rogue can do but they're unlikely to have the same approach as the less bookish straight rogue.

    Now all you should need is a helm of true seeing to make sense of all that lot (Should help with the concealment )
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  10. #20
    Member callmemigs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haphazard View Post
    INTP
    INFP
    INFJ
    ISTP
    ISFP
    ISTJ

    What the hell is an INTJ, and what makes an INTJ not these other six types?
    I think MBTI types are all interconnected to one another.

Similar Threads

  1. Naomi Klein: What the hell is her problem, anyway?
    By pure_mercury in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-21-2009, 05:37 PM
  2. What the hell is going on in this picture?
    By RiderOnTheStorm in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 06-08-2009, 01:52 AM
  3. What the hell is going on? (Conspiracy)
    By Fluffywolf in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-02-2009, 07:10 AM
  4. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-28-2009, 12:55 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO